Canon EOS M preview samples

There are 30 images in the preview samples gallery. Please do not reproduce any of these images on a website or any newsletter / magazine without prior permission (see our copyright page). We make the originals available for private users to download to their own machines for personal examination or printing (in conjunction with this review), we do so in good faith, please don't abuse it.

Unless otherwise noted images taken with no particular settings at full resolution. Because our review images are now hosted on the 'galleries' section of dpreview.com, you can enjoy all of the new galleries functionality when browsing these samples.

Mirrorless models offer reduced weight, and that is a big benefit. But I found it a bit tricky to figure out what the weight actually is for my preferred configuration. That made it hard to do useful comparisons. The problem is sometimes the weight is without the battery or without the lens or with the wrong lens. So here is what I found on the weight of the EOS-M.

With battery and with the 18-55mm lens, the weight is 506 to 508 grams. This compares to 775 grams for the Canon T4i/650D, similarly equipped. So the mirrorless model has a weight advantage of 268g. That is significant, but far from half the weight of the DSLR. The two cameras will probably produce pics with similar IQ. But note that the DSLR has a viewfinder and flash, which the M does not.

The new offerings from the different manufacturers are fantastic. But I think it is important to gather all the facts you need to make the best buying decisions.

Edlu - I agree, i think the weight issue is directly related to the sensor size choice. Canon will find it hard to make small native lenses for an APS-C sized camera. Look at Sony and their native lenses available for NEX. A couple years on and i think it has more bodies than lenses.

I am hoping fervently that a suite of EF-M lenses will be introduced and that they will be smaller than the EF and EF-S lenses. One hopes that the new lens mount makes that possible. And it is the established pattern, for instance if you compare 35mm gear to 120 format. The smaller format lenses are smaller and lighter -- and faster by about 1 stop.

But the 18-55mm EF-M lens is not lighter than the 18-55mm EF-S lens, nor is it faster. Not a good start!

And by "mirrorless", you mean point and shoot? I'm scanning through pages and pages here on DP, trying to find out what the difference between "mirrorless" and point and shoot is. Apparently, just a psychological marketing distinction based on a premium price.

It is not a psychological distinction. A critical physical difference is sensor size. The sensors in point & shoot cameras are much smaller than those in mirrorless cameras, which are in turn smaller than those in DSLRs. Sensor size is linked to pixel size which in turn is linked to image quality.

The biggest differences are sensor size and the ability to switch lenses. The controls can be very P&S-like, but in my experience, the sensor makes for notable improvements in image quality, especially in low light.

Yes its the difference in size of the sensor which as Olympus system users we are so used to knowing.The sensor size on the Olympus 4/3rd cameras and the micro 4/3rd cameras is the same - (Four Thirds (17.3 x 13 mm) so they are able to make tiny lenses on their OM-D EM-5.In the case of Canon the SLR and the mirrorless cameras are having the same sensor size (APS-C (22.3 x 14.9 mm) so will be difficult to make smaller lenses for the EOS-M series bcos of the larger sensor.

Tiny Point and shoots have a miniscule sensor size- so the poor image quality, whereas with the Oly and other mirrorless offerings the sensor size being large enough its IQ is simply stunning(in fact the Oly OMD EM-5 has an IQ quality on par with the Canon 5D Mark II camera as has been shown by the review on DPR and thats why the OMD is making waves all over the world.

Remember folks, all your optical viewfinders from the "good ole daze" will fit right on the top in the hot shoe. Been working for decades that way, and being able to use my Canon DSLR lenses is really cool. Mic input and level screen, auto focus during video will be very nice too! I'm in.

What any one of them, cant see how, surely it would have to be aligned with the lens and its respective focal length, you could use one of those lupes that fits over the screen, difficult because you would have to remove it every time you wanted to make an adjustment. Bet canon have one waiting in the wings just like all the other manufacturers, it will be a steel at just under £200.

Except that not everyone wants to have the flash installed all the time, nor use it very much. On-camera flash is a killer.Canon themselves suggest that the high-ISO performance means the flash isn't required for many situations where it migh have been used previously.

I was interested in this release because I have a Canon DSLR system and I have been thinking about moving to m4/3. The advantage of a Canon mirrorless camera being it easier to use my Canon lenses on it. The problem being that I can't think of many occasions where I could use this body on my Canon lenses. The lack of any viewfinder ability, and the lack of focus peaking, mean that except for static tripod use, it would have little use apart from as a carry around camera.

In addition the AF speed looks slow to me. On the video reviews I've seen the touchscreen is touched, and there is a noticeable lag before it focuses on this point, whereas with m4/3 now it is nearly instant.

I think it's acceptable as Canon's first entry, but with this feature set it needed to be much cheaper. And I do mean "much cheaper" i.e. as cheap or not cheaper than any other similar camera. As it stands we have to wait to see what else Canon produces to know how serious they are about mirrorless.

OH GREAT..... just what i have been waiting for, something small, compact with a decent sized sensor that i can use with my existing EF lens collection, small enough for street photography, a lot less obvious than a 5D.

BUT why no view finder i don't want to stand there with the other mobile phone users.

Pehaps cannon have completely missed the boat and forgot to add direct dialing and incoming calls as a feature.

Design and IQ are good. Yet it is a bit too expensive in my opinion. I would either buy a premium compact (which fits in my pocket and I can really have always with me) or a DSLR (which is way bigger but more flexible).

Maybe 22mm is good for street photography, but honestly not being a pro I would trade lower image quality for a zoom.

Having a big sensor and a good lens on a compact is all what one enthusiast needs (even if not many example of such a camera are available). I do not see any point in being able to mount a pro lens on a camera like that.

Since the market is already well represented with existing products from other makers, it is not surprising that the reaction to this camera is a bit lukewarm as it misses out a lot of things (viewfinder, flash, accessory port) that the others have.

I guess all of these could be addressed in future models. However whereas Nikon were pretty clear about the technical direction on launch, Canon are not.

Almost certainly means future versions will compete with the Rebel line or even replace it, hence they don't want to play their hand too early for fear of damaging sales.

However it does rather imply that Nikon will have to think seriously about a larger sensor MILC camera, even it's based on the F mount.

I think that Canon is studiing the market with this camera. They don't want their custumer to go away on m4/3 or any other mirrorless systems.I don't see anyone using this very small camera with big L glasses, it makes no senses. But I see a lot of Canon addik buying this type of camera With pancake lens and leave their FF dslr at home. It will sell well.

That doesn't tmake any sense ? If you're not going to mount your exisiting lenses than the World is your Oyster in terms of choice eg NEX7 etc etc Surely you would not buy it just because it says Canon ?

I looked at the mounts and compared their size, in particular their inner rings.

Assuming the EOS-M mount is meant for APS-C (and it sure looks like this), then by comparison, the NEX mount is for an APS-H and the Nikon-1 mount is for a FourThirds sensor.

However, next to a K-01 (which has a mount known to support full frame) the NEX mount appears to support the same size. So, it may actually be made for full frame even.

I wonder why Canon made the inner ring this big (without saving space by also reducing the metal mount). It's a bit the same with the Nikon 1, it could support APS-C with a smaller inner ring. For Nikon, I guess it is because they're still going to release their DX mirrorless with a separate mount. But for Canon, I don't see the reason.

Why not, having tourist CX mount and an FXM mount would make sense, both are different worlds and price range. Making and apsc in between would make people choose between the 2 bottom items and the 2 top ones, where the apsc will be the top on one side, and the bottom on the other. That would make choice difficult despite there was a mirrorless for just any category of wallet in there. Now, since market is now saturated in apsc mirrorless cameras, Nikon having a CX and an FXM would be the choice to go for. Except if Nikon was interested to have one in any of that 3 categories. Now, how about a square sensor in 24x24 or 36x36, that was an other good option. Sony had this in perspective according to rumors.

I find this forum quite disturbing. Whilst there is a great deal of considered and well informed critique from the majority of contributors; the level of pure venom expressed by the dissenters frequently borders on the unhinged. If the best you can contribute is a comment to the effect that the camera is ugly, or some other equally inane pronouncement, then I fail to see what you hope to achieve here.

This is a nice release from canon. Its where most of us expected it to be with a first entry. Canon have ticked most of the boxes in this offering. It does not have the all features of the other MILC systems (But no camera has). There seems to be a lot of ‘noise’ about lack of features buy some posters , but then trace ‘noise’ back to where it came from. If canon had released this camera with a EVF and a few other DSLR features we would have had a lot more ‘noise’ over at the lower canon dslr forums as well as in this section.

I am not a canon users so I have nothing to protect. This is a nice offering from canon for its intended market. The future ? Well that’s really going to be interesting.

what you say is right in the view of Canon targeting tourist and P&S enthusiast crowd. But, even if the things is ok and well done for them, the price does not follows the game, To price what it targets, it should be sold 600$ with a 18-55. The price is one that fits to a camera with a viewfinder and a few more advanced features this camera does not has. As such it is a hit in the water. Canon will be forced to drop the price, or give the 2 lenses in the kit for 800$. An I bet all you want that the price will drop soon.

Awesome!! Love shooting with a box with less buttons, more deep diving menus, and touch screen. A true photographer's tool to capture moments.........

Sorry to say its not all about IQ. Im sure a floor room display at a Best Buy will generate enough sales from soccer moms and dads. Which is sad to say, the bulk on Canons income comes from these days.

The perfect mirrorless camera Canon's bean counters can produce. Its kinda sad to see how out of touch Canon is, as a leader in the industry.

So you claim they will sell a lot of these cameras to their primary market ... and yet they are out of touch? I'm not sure how that contradictory logic works.

It seems they are very in touch with the camera market at many levels, producing everything from the little point & shoots up to the 1DX, responding to a vast variety of photographic needs, and selling a heck of a lot of cameras and lenses.

Sad to see a leader in the industry "out of touch"? Look again. And if you want a camera with more buttons, they make that too.

Yes, you are right. Leica has mirror less cameras from the beginning in the 1020's till now.

But the difference is that they have a viewfinder not only a screen. I don't like cameras without viewfinder because they are more unstable to me. So Canon please make a model with a electronic viewfinder like nikon or Sony.

"It's now almost four years since Panasonic first introduced us to the mirrorless interchangeable lens camera, in the shape of the Micro Four Thirds Lumix DMC-G1."

Wasn't Leica doing mirrorless cameras in the 1930's? Hmm, now that I think about it, didn't ALL cameras start out mirrorless?

What's old is new, what's new is old. Fashions come, and fashions go. It keeps things interesting for people who try not to be like their parents, but instead end up being just like their grandparents, haha :)

Boy Canon is really messing up. This camera looks like something you give your 5 year old as their first camera. (ULGY!!) Apparently they have not been watching their competitions SONY's RX100 is killing them in what the G1X and this mirrorless should have been. And these M lens choices are slow!! What is the point If I have to use an EOS lens adapter to use a good lens? I'd rather carry my 5D3 in that case. Any person using a 70-200 2.8IS on this camera would be a fool (much less look like one).

Man I want one, I have a Panasonic GF2 which has the same sensor as the GF3 and the image quality is seriously sub par. If I could get a camera that is just a little bit bigger but has the image quality of a Canon DSLR PLUS auto focuses my DSLR lens. Very interested, will start saving.

Canon does not read the news about the smartphone taking over the world. No viewfinder and no articulating screen is a killer as far as I am concerned. Maybe the next model will suit all my good canon lenses. In the meantime I will stick with my 600D and my sony nex 5n. Sold my 7D as it was too heavy. I miss the viewfinder and speed of it but my neck thanks me.

People are going to eventually wake up and realize that smartphone pictures blow. I really believe this.

Obviously, the smartphone is going to suffice for many (if not most), but I don't think the compact camera is going anywhere anytime soon. The fundamental limitations of what you can do with a smartphone sensor make it unsuited for so many of the things you can do even with a subcompact. But here's the way I look at it--no one wants to take a big vacation and be left with nothing but crappy smartphone photos.

I just wish this had come out earlier. I've been a devoted Canon P&S user, but I chose to go to Nikon for my first DSLR. I love my D5100 and the glass I've got for it so far, but the idea that had I bought a T3i, I could have eventually upgraded my G10 to something like this, maintaining some amount of compatibility, would have been pretty compelling. I probably wouldn't buy this EOS-M, but it's pretty easy for me to visualize this thing's descendents being pretty badass cameras.

I wonder how devoted Nikon is to CX....I can't really see them launching a separate DX compatible MILC mount while maintaining CX.

This cameras is too big for compact use. this only good for DSLR backup. so it must have many good features which available on DSLR. If canon want to catch more compact user, they must release : with built in flash, smaller lens. otherwise user will not buy it

Usually, I only read your posts here. On the account of Canon's debut into mirror-less, I thought I'd join in on the brouhaha.

Canon is smart. Canon is testing the market on their terms, design and all. I imagine that both the advancements in EVF technology and Sensor technology will alter the course of this model. It may even become a vanguard for their product-line: Compact, EVF, DSLR.

In the next five-years, I want this camera to be THE travel-camera. I imagine Fuji to hold the highest competition --looks and other things. (I am a digital Fuji-patron, despite only having a GW690II.) Yet if this Canon is endowed with an EVF in future models, along with improved sensor capabilities (given Canon's impressive algorithms), tack on a silk-nightie and she can go with me anywhere.

I totally agree. There are a lot of short-sighted people on this forum who seem to think this is the last word on Canon MILC. Right now, they've put themselves in a great spot to feel out the market. If MILC really catches on, we might see EF-M really replace the bottom end of the EOS lineup. Or it might replace the G series. This is just the vanguard, and there are a lot of directions they might go with this.

I respectfully disagree, Canon has had plenty of time to see what's happening in the market and release a product that would compete. They could have, and I feel should have, come out strong, but they decided to protect their DSLR sales, similar to Nikon.

Their main rivals are Olympus and Panasonic who have no DSLR sales to protect and are going after Canon, Nikon, Sony, et al, in the majority of the DSLR markets (beginner, enthusiast, etc.).

I don't doubt that Canon will produce a more enthusiast version of the EOS-M, but it would have been nice to see them go for it straight out of the blocks. Maybe releasing two versions like Nikon. They have the engineering expertise and user base, they just needed to use it.

This IS the future of camera bodies and systems. The DSLR may never be replaced for the specialist but everyone who has Oly and Panasonic DSLR kit and recent MFT stuff is carrying the smaller kit 90% of the time, even if there are some lumpy old lenses and a converter in the bag with it.

Ultimately, outside the studio and a few specialist applications you can do more with lighter, handier kit, if you are not making big sacrifices on IQ

c_henry: You're right that they've had plenty of time to observe the market, but as of right now, I would bet you that the mirrorless market is still a tiny fraction of the overall market. So even though they're a bit behind the curve, years from now, no one will remember how late they were or what the EOS-M was. Remember, Kodak had the first commercially available DSLR--they're hardly leading the market now.

Actually, Canon uses a 1.6X crop which is "slightly smaller" than real APS-C's 1.5X crop, yet bigger than micro4/3 2X crop (which also has a different aspect ratio). Crops are linear measures; sensor areas in square mm are approximately: micro4/3 225, Canon "APS-C" 329, other APS-C 370, and full frame 860. The fact that Canon's APS-C is 12% less area than other APS-C is quite noticeable when using wide-angle lenses and has always been a factor against Canon for me.

Taking the car analogy way too far, micro4/3 is a two-seater, Canon APS-C seats 2 adults and 2 kids, other APS-C can comfortably seat 4 adults, and full-frame is a van seating 9. Medium formats are busses and Nikon 1 is a motorcycle. ;)

"The movie record button is placed on the camera's shoulder for easy operation by your thumb. It's somewhat exposed, but the chances of accidental activation are minimized by the fact that it's only active when the mode dial is set the movie position. In stills shooting modes it does nothing."

Then what the hell /is/ it for?? In video mode, the shutter button could just as well be used..

So here we have Canon bragging about slashing 1/3 of the buttons /while/ keeping an utterly redundant button next to the thumb?

I would assume that this EOS M works the same way as their DSLR's....while shooting video, you can capture stills by pressing the shutter button. In that case, this is most assuredly NOT a useless button, and they most assuredly could NOT re-purpose the shutter button in movie mode.

@GregGory:Then what the hell /is/ it for??Good point here! I think that cute red little button will go find with red camera, if you know what I mean :-) Or Magic Lantern will turn it into something more useful.

Of course they could re-purpose any button in every mode/ function imaginable.. lol, these are all soft buttons, not a film Leica where the shutter button is mechanically coupled to the shutter mechanism :)

They could easily make eg. the "info" button into full res pic button in video mode, but you do have a point that consistency with the Drebel UI could be a priority. In this case, it's an insult to the buyers that they didn't turn the rec button into an "AF/AE lock" button in stills mode...

Still no real competition to m4/3, they can relax and take it easy. Especially early reviews tell, that Canon M is slow as a turtle. Would be nice, if m4/3 had to push a bit more quality of sensors used.

From "imaging-resource" review this quote - "I'll gladly retract all these words, returning to this preview to make all the necessary changes if Canon makes speed improvements over the T4i's Hybrid AF, but I'd be remiss not to report that if the AF system is "just like the T4i" a lot of buyers are going to be frustrated with the EOS M."

That's the truth. unfortunately, Number1 and Best do not always come together, aint they? Otherwise McBurger and Cola would be the best food and drink in the world. Canon makes mass products. They know how to make best profit. And they care in making best particular products much less than any other camera company.

I couldn't disagree more... with the quality control issues (s100 (lens) and rebel (handle)), poor drab thoughtless design in compacts for a few years now, a sluggish g1x (so it doesn't compete with their dslr line), and now this...THE WRITING IS ON THE WALL... this could well be one of those turning points where the giant stumbles and others come in to fill all the lacks... and one or two of those will shine... as for the long term, 5 years, you may as well toss a coin - no one can predict that. Might you be wearing Canon glasses that are distorting your sight?

I currently own and use an Olympus SZ-30MR 24x zoom P&S, doing a lot of video on it. Compared to that the attractoion of the EOS-M is the adjustable volume control and the external microphone, the hotshoe and the APS-C sensor. I see the EOS-M as a passable back-up for professional use.

To the gripers - if you are not in the market, that is your problem. Don't make it a problem for everyone else.

So if you had $800 (or more for the zoom kit) this would be your preferred choice?

I'm not saying it's a bad camera, but when looking around it doesn't come across as a "breaking-new-ground-worth-a-premium-price" product.

Granted to Canon, if they can pull this off, reusing their EOS DLSR hw/sw development and selling a MILC at that price, with very low capital investment, they will make lots of $$$ and as such be the winner.

Good question.If you want best canon lens compatibility and smallest solution and if you want it now (now means octoberish:)) then you have no other choice. But if you want best canon lens compatibility and care a little less about size, you could go for 600D or 650D. Added viewfinder, flash, swivel screen and proper grip of upcoming (next year octoberish?) enthusiastic EOS-N, will anyway make it much larger. And the price tag around $1200-$1400 will make safe the sales of Rebels.

Canon were never going to do anything radical on their first outing into mirrorless - they've got far too much invested in SLR sales to risk frightening the horses. What's interesting is how much more leeway they've left themselves compared to Nikon - using an APS-C sensor leaves them room to make much more capable models in the future. There's no reason why there couldn't be an EOS-M equivalent of the Sony Nex 7 if the market shifts towards mirrorless and they don't feel the need to protect the original Eos line so much. Given the performance of the Eos 7D (and what Fuji has been able to do with the APS-C sensor in the X-Pro 1) the fact that the Eos M mount can't support full-frame doesn't mean we won't eventually see some high-performing enthusiast/pro Eos M bodies.

But I'm convinced Canon will move very cautiously, at least for the next few years.

Beats me why they didn't use the G1-X sensor. Then it less of a competitor to their DSLRS and allows smaller lenses etc. I think they are floundering at the moment while the third party players innovate.

Dougbm_2: Because they couldn't have had EF/EF-S compatibility ahd they done that. Sony's proven that an APS-C can work with mirrorless. And now, they're always going to be able to lord sensor size and compatibility over their real competitors: Nikon.

I think if Canon launched M mount 18-135mm STM, we would be reading whole different story here. That kind of range would satisfy most of needs. But, Canon want early adopters to buy first pancake, than 18-55mm, maybe some legacy with adapter, and after than they will happy their brandlovers with 18-135mm STM

Can you include a shutter sound video in all review with some way of standardizing volume (same recording settings, same distance from the microphone, quiet room etc.) I know with some other cameras (early PEN's) I was blown away by how loud and intrusive the shutter was for such a small camera

I think Nikon made a huge mistake with the CX format, and I thought so months ago. Canon chose a larger sensor that provides continuity with the rest of their pro line. For people who make most of their decisions between the big two brands, I think Canon is much better positioned for the future.

WOW! What a slug! Watch for the autofocus: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sa_9kNAMcIw#t=02m00s

Really, I'm not enjoying bashing this camera. Indeed, I wish it were smashingly good, which is only good for competition. What were Canon thinking?

"35% fewer buttons"? Whether you think that's good or not, that someone from marketing put that figure out in the world to discuss says some things about how disconnected from the market and actual photography the people who made this camera were.

@thisisjh: Only a troll would state something has failed before its even hit the market. I'd bet you (a pretty penny) that when this thing hits the streets it'll sell like hotcakes. It was always intended to be a middle-ground entrant, and not necessarily a "king of the features" type mirrorless option. Personally, I'll hold out for a Canon EOS M entrant that has an EVF, which I'm sure is on the way, but so far I'm fairly impressed.

I think it's pretty clear that this is only Canon's first foray into mirrorless, and that they've targeted this toward the bottom end of the poweruser market. Not to knock this camera, because it looks really nice, but with any fewer features, it would appear a bit deficient. And with only the two lenses available, it seems positioned to be just behind the G1 X.

I fully expect to see a more premium model out within a year or so with features (like an extra control dial, EVF, swivel screen, pop-up flash, etc.) that clearly establish it as the superior to the G1 X and stack up nicely to Sony's NEX-7. This is just a taste of what's to come, so I think it's a bit erroneous to look at this as Canon's final word on MILC.

Also, for all the critics out there, I think people are discounting the amount of pull the Canon brand, sexy form factor, and EF compatibility will have at the point-of-sale. Additionally, the price is obviously going to come down a couple hundred bucks over time.

Unlike the NEX-5N (which oddly wasn't shown in the comparison shots on page 1), this camera is so dependent on the touchscreen that an EVF actually could be rather awkward. We'll have to see if a later version heads more in the direction of the NEX-7, with controls that work well with your eye on the EVF....

Incidentally, Canon's sample images posted for the EOS M (at http://web.canon.jp/imaging/eosd/samples/eosm/) look overly smooth, lacking the crispness one would expect from this sensor. The EOS 650D images at dpreview certainly look much more crisp...?

I am trying really hard to figure out why anyone would even consider this camera, given the really strong field. This is a bit less than so-so, but then I always think that when a camera is offered in red, it's not really targeting serious photographers anyway. This is for snapshooters with lots of money who don't follow reviews.

Nice comment, to which reviews are you referring to? I did not see any around yet. And judging a camera from body color, wow, that-s an argument! Thanks for that, buying black only cameras will for sure make my photos better, thanks. Judge photographers from their photos not their gear please.

I share all the gripes about the dull user's interface with You, no doubt. As a part-time Canon pro for 15yrs, I expected a much more refined entry into the ILC market.

But, on the other hand, this little camera appeals to me like no mirrorless camera else. Maybe we should take the livin' easy and just point and shoot with it. The fun potential is immense. If one had offered to me a P&S with the IQ of the EOS T2i (550D) one or two yrs ago, I'd have jumped up and down.

This lil' gem is by all means a proper alternative to the G1X, and I wonder how the pics will be looking like if my Tokina 11-16 is attached once...

A nice toy. But I need two dials to operate in M mode, too bad that the top is not a real dial, just looks like one. Also the battery performance is poor and the system needs way more small but high quality lenses. The slow f2 pancake is nothing for me. However a set of dedicated EF-M lenses 10 f2.8, 15 f2, 20 f1.8 (ok this is close to the 22 f2), 30 f1.4,50 f1.8, 85 f 2 and 135 f2.8 would be appealing. Throw in zooms 17-50 f2.8 50-150 f4, both stabilized and you have a highly attractive system.

"It allows all of Canon's existing EF and EF-S mount lenses to be used on the EOS M with full functionality (although AF speeds are unlikely to be anything to write home about)." referring to the adapter of course.

This camera has pixels dedicated to phase detection, wouldn't that mean that in theory the focus speed is identical when compared to canon DSLRs?

In short, no. The EOS M uses what Canon calls Hybrid AF, with phase detection pixels used to set approximate focus, then contrast detection used to set focus accurately. This exactly the same system as used by the EOS 650D, which focuses distinctly slower using Hybrid AF in Live View compared to its conventional PDAF with the optical finder.